A big recurring theme in a lot of sci-fi i read/watch is manipulation of the invisible guy in the sky to control others. Foundation & Foundation and empire (the mule stuff is more straight up sci-fi, but the religion and economic control is quite insightful) Stargate (movie & SG1), apart from the obvious goa'uld stuff, the series regularly has local leaders keep the superstition going abuse their position even when there is no goa'uld. (not really insightful but hey it's available in tv form)
The inefficiencies of torture have also been covered innumerable times, i am yet to come across a good book/film with a clear anti drug prohibition story, any suggestions?
If you've got practical suggestions for how we could be more open than this, I'd love to hear them, but I think there has already been a lot of traction in that direction.
And there's this agreement explicitly waiving the right to sue users of silverlight implementations.
The rest is good, but with the threat of sueing forks and other distros for packaging moonlight, it's not much better than flash
erm 1) its easier to remove non-root malware 2) there are still many exploits for many programs, reducing the effect of these is still a good thing. 3) not all problems are malicious, buggy programs as root can cause much more trouble than the same program in a jail/chroot
selinux, apparmor type security allowing it to run AS root while being locked down? or chroot allowing it to think its root, while its really in a fakeroot?
nah i don't think anybody has been doing that for years on linux, nope not at all!
ofc its oversimplified, but so is bios+browser = future.
To put a browser on the screen - you will need to have a windowing system
The windowing system would only need to be the basics of xorg (something akin to TinyX) instead of full xorg and DE as is currently the norm, and that's ignoring the possibility of doing the whole thing in framebuffer (with gpx for the mouse).
Not to mention - which user owns the browser?
1) That isn't a problem for single login systems 2) BIOS+browser would have that problem too 3) You could prompt for a login 4) You could just run it as "nobody"
Im not saying my approach is very good (tbh its just a natural progression of the current race to the desktop but to a web browser instead) just that its far superior to the idea of a browser in the bios.
Erm multiseat has been around and will always be around due to the xorg architecture. It has *always* been possible. There are basically 2 solutions:
*"the old way" setup xorg.conf with two xservers with seperate gfx card (it may be possible to do it on one gfx card but there will probably be driver/performance problems), keyboard & mouse. Additionally he can use a simple script to switch over xorg configurations and use the same setup as a dual monitor system. From a technical standpoint this is the way to go, 2 users, 2 accounts, 2 desktops.
*"the new way" much more complicated and im not entirely sure how it would work, but also much more powerful and dynamic, use mpx and strange keyboard binding to use both mice and both keyboards on a single xserver (preferably powered by two gfx cards anyway). This is the new shiny way to go, technically inferior but more userfriendly once setup.
So yeah - it seems there's something more going on here. Or they're just some script kiddies who bought a "hacking technique" from someone more advanced and now they can only replicate the issue on that one device.
You mean somebody posted this on 4chan (alongside tome cruise's number OFC)?
The installer DOES decide if you let it (i don't know what happens if you choose non-guided as ive not installed ubuntu in years but it might even give you sane defaults then too) but many people don't like the defaults (on any OS).
Yah, but why can't it just automatically resize the file as needed? Like every other OS does? That's exactly my point.
Automatically resizing files has downsides: 1)it can cause plenty of fragmentation 2)increases the burden on an already busy system (the resizing, having a static file wont incur this) 3)has no limit, if a program goes rouge it can eat up your entire root partition
But... the OS knows how much HD it has available, how much memory it needs, and whether I'm hibernating.
The OS doesn't and cannot know how valuable that space is to you (Are you the kind of person that will fill up a 200GB drive? do you have an external drive? are you going to be overusing your ram? etc). I also doubt very much that any OS keeps constant track of how much ram you use and it would need to scrape through logs count how often you hibernate.
I would wager it would simplify more scenarios than it would complicate.
I can only think of it simplifing your artificial scenario (that of a power user that wants to manually partition his disks but doesn't want to worry about the size of his swap partition), while complicating: Shared swap between multiple distros Increases minimum size of root partition Hibernation (currently it just needs to check the swaps, it would need to mount the necessary partition (i'd guess/var, and find the file before continuing with the bootup))
The current way works, for every situation but yours, so its going to take a much more persuasive argument than "having to select an amount (if you choose to partition your disk and can later be changed as long as you choose LVM(default)) during the installation might scare away users", but by all means make your case...
Last time i used the GUI installer it could, if you selected guided or whatever its called, however: 1) Windows cannot read LVM partitions (which i think guided uses) 2)"Power-users" will want to sort out the partitions 3)Like with the page-file there is debate on the setting, because if its too big its wasted HDD space, if its too small you cant hibernate and if its far too small when you run out of RAM bad stuff happens. What you need varies very much by usage case, e.g if you have enough ram and don't hibernate you wont need more than 128, if you mount/tmp as a ram device and use it excessively then you will need quite a bit, actually using more than 1G of either swap or page-file will bring your system to a halt anyway (but it's too bad if you don't mind taking a few minutes to task switch between high-ram applications on a low ram system)
So while you can just stick with defaults, your in a better position to decide what you need than some developer at canonical because you'll know what you need it for and how much you value HDD space.
I think its using a partition instead of a file is a unix thing, (does OSX use a swap file or a partition?), there has been talk of switching to a swap-file but it's not really worth the effort (and complicates a fair few scenarios), when new users can stick to the defaults.
The solution to slow booting is not to put MORE stuff in the bios, the solution is a move adaptive startup process, if a user only uses firefox then boot up the system to the point it can browse the web ASAP and load the rest of the crap in the background (at a low priority so not to affect browsing) 1.mount/etc,/usr &/home (or windows equivilents) 2.load sandboxing software (UAC/selinux/etc) 3.start networking 4.put a webbrowser in fullscreen 5.profit and eventually load the rest of the OS
It's quick booting, customizable, gives a full featured OS eventually, i doubt many people want to sacrifice the last 2 for the 1st.
I skimmed over the key parts and think its a good article.
However i think there are some mistakes regarding his recommended setup: 10-30GB if your going to install lots of applications seams excessive, i fit my system in 4 and I'd be amazed if you could end up with >10GB for desktop programs perhaps 10-15GB would have been a better recommendation? Swap should never be more than 1GB unless you plan on hibernating in which case 75% should be enough (1473M with 951 swap hibernates fine), does anybody really use 4GB swap? Also why would you use GNOME on ubuntu, KDE3 on debian forever!!!!!!!!:P
but O2 -> O2 isn't a reaction so the Oxygen HAS to react with something.Experience suggests carbon is the best candidate to react, so carbon as a catalyst is unlikely.
when will people learn: firefly (yeah if you put a series in the wrong genre and then move it around soo much it wont get rating) Family guy (I don't actually like this one, but hey it was big enough to eventually come back) Futurama (Why would you let the Simpson die such a slow death, while futurama was killed while still good) im sure there are more.
They seam particularly bad at handling sci-fi, where due to their constant shuffles, it seams the only way to get ratings is to put crap that anybody can watch (in any order). This leads to monster of the week series with no plot/character development (e.g they pumped out 2 extra seasons of the x files when everybody was ready to let it die).
an amazing 10 to 15 hours of battery life for less than 2 pounds.
? powertop shows a differences of just 3watts between low brighness display and blacked out, *plus smaller displays use less power anyway (could somebody explain why you cant just use an array of white LEDs to backlight your screen though, its the backlight that uses the power right?) *the are low power usage wireless chips, but i thought the main reason wireless drains power is because it has to wake up the CPU (on lower power CPUs this is a non-issue) *graphics chips (where choice of chip can save a great deal) and drivers could turn the card off when the screen is blanked *HDD usage which can be solved in software (soft-fsyncs, etc)
The tech is there for lower power usage netbooks, when the price of the other low-power components (OLED, wireless "on-a-chip", etc) drops ARM will matter.
Your limited by video your editing software, the suites provide the functionality.
What benefit does a PC have over a Mac? Price? That's an illusion.
How so, you can pic up the specs for an the $1200 for less than $600, so even if mac osx has slight advantage in terms of AV technologies, this would instantly be neutralised by the specs of a pc you can pick up for $1000 (from retailers obviosuly if you only have a few of these it may be worth building it and trouncing anything else on spec)
Obviously not, but that is the best way to get the concept of whats going on, into a form us humans can understand, duh! Like when the communications of the 2nd foundation are transcribed into words because their form of communication is so advanced we wouldn't understand it!
Slashdot Mirror
A big recurring theme in a lot of sci-fi i read/watch is manipulation of the invisible guy in the sky to control others.
Foundation & Foundation and empire (the mule stuff is more straight up sci-fi, but the religion and economic control is quite insightful)
Stargate (movie & SG1), apart from the obvious goa'uld stuff, the series regularly has local leaders keep the superstition going abuse their position even when there is no goa'uld. (not really insightful but hey it's available in tv form)
The inefficiencies of torture have also been covered innumerable times, i am yet to come across a good book/film with a clear anti drug prohibition story, any suggestions?
If you've got practical suggestions for how we could be more open than this, I'd love to hear them, but I think there has already been a lot of traction in that direction.
And there's this agreement explicitly waiving the right to sue users of silverlight implementations.
The rest is good, but with the threat of sueing forks and other distros for packaging moonlight, it's not much better than flash
erm
1) its easier to remove non-root malware
2) there are still many exploits for many programs, reducing the effect of these is still a good thing.
3) not all problems are malicious, buggy programs as root can cause much more trouble than the same program in a jail/chroot
selinux, apparmor type security allowing it to run AS root while being locked down?
or chroot allowing it to think its root, while its really in a fakeroot?
nah i don't think anybody has been doing that for years on linux, nope not at all!
in fairness
1) its a chroot with a custom set of requirements
2) your dealing with windows admins
The APIs are fairly stable, its the constantly shifting libraries that cause most of problems, but if you go completely closed that's not a problem.
ofc its oversimplified, but so is bios+browser = future.
To put a browser on the screen - you will need to have a windowing system
The windowing system would only need to be the basics of xorg (something akin to TinyX) instead of full xorg and DE as is currently the norm, and that's ignoring the possibility of doing the whole thing in framebuffer (with gpx for the mouse).
Not to mention - which user owns the browser?
1) That isn't a problem for single login systems
2) BIOS+browser would have that problem too
3) You could prompt for a login
4) You could just run it as "nobody"
Im not saying my approach is very good (tbh its just a natural progression of the current race to the desktop but to a web browser instead) just that its far superior to the idea of a browser in the bios.
Erm multiseat has been around and will always be around due to the xorg architecture. It has *always* been possible. There are basically 2 solutions:
*"the old way" setup xorg.conf with two xservers with seperate gfx card (it may be possible to do it on one gfx card but there will probably be driver/performance problems), keyboard & mouse. Additionally he can use a simple script to switch over xorg configurations and use the same setup as a dual monitor system. From a technical standpoint this is the way to go, 2 users, 2 accounts, 2 desktops.
*"the new way" much more complicated and im not entirely sure how it would work, but also much more powerful and dynamic, use mpx and strange keyboard binding to use both mice and both keyboards on a single xserver (preferably powered by two gfx cards anyway). This is the new shiny way to go, technically inferior but more userfriendly once setup.
Can somebody they just setup pirateforge in Sweden to host these projects?
So yeah - it seems there's something more going on here. Or they're just some script kiddies who bought a "hacking technique" from someone more advanced and now they can only replicate the issue on that one device.
You mean somebody posted this on 4chan (alongside tome cruise's number OFC)?
The installer DOES decide if you let it (i don't know what happens if you choose non-guided as ive not installed ubuntu in years but it might even give you sane defaults then too) but many people don't like the defaults (on any OS).
Yah, but why can't it just automatically resize the file as needed? Like every other OS does? That's exactly my point.
Automatically resizing files has downsides:
1)it can cause plenty of fragmentation
2)increases the burden on an already busy system (the resizing, having a static file wont incur this)
3)has no limit, if a program goes rouge it can eat up your entire root partition
But... the OS knows how much HD it has available, how much memory it needs, and whether I'm hibernating.
The OS doesn't and cannot know how valuable that space is to you (Are you the kind of person that will fill up a 200GB drive? do you have an external drive? are you going to be overusing your ram? etc). I also doubt very much that any OS keeps constant track of how much ram you use and it would need to scrape through logs count how often you hibernate.
I would wager it would simplify more scenarios than it would complicate.
I can only think of it simplifing your artificial scenario (that of a power user that wants to manually partition his disks but doesn't want to worry about the size of his swap partition), while complicating: /var, and find the file before continuing with the bootup))
Shared swap between multiple distros
Increases minimum size of root partition
Hibernation (currently it just needs to check the swaps, it would need to mount the necessary partition (i'd guess
The current way works, for every situation but yours, so its going to take a much more persuasive argument than "having to select an amount (if you choose to partition your disk and can later be changed as long as you choose LVM(default)) during the installation might scare away users", but by all means make your case...
Last time i used the GUI installer it could, if you selected guided or whatever its called, however: /tmp as a ram device and use it excessively then you will need quite a bit, actually using more than 1G of either swap or page-file will bring your system to a halt anyway (but it's too bad if you don't mind taking a few minutes to task switch between high-ram applications on a low ram system)
1) Windows cannot read LVM partitions (which i think guided uses)
2)"Power-users" will want to sort out the partitions
3)Like with the page-file there is debate on the setting, because if its too big its wasted HDD space, if its too small you cant hibernate and if its far too small when you run out of RAM bad stuff happens. What you need varies very much by usage case, e.g if you have enough ram and don't hibernate you wont need more than 128, if you mount
So while you can just stick with defaults, your in a better position to decide what you need than some developer at canonical because you'll know what you need it for and how much you value HDD space.
I think its using a partition instead of a file is a unix thing, (does OSX use a swap file or a partition?), there has been talk of switching to a swap-file but it's not really worth the effort (and complicates a fair few scenarios), when new users can stick to the defaults.
The solution to slow booting is not to put MORE stuff in the bios, the solution is a move adaptive startup process, if a user only uses firefox then boot up the system to the point it can browse the web ASAP and load the rest of the crap in the background (at a low priority so not to affect browsing) /etc,/usr & /home (or windows equivilents)
1.mount
2.load sandboxing software (UAC/selinux/etc)
3.start networking
4.put a webbrowser in fullscreen
5.profit and eventually load the rest of the OS
It's quick booting, customizable, gives a full featured OS eventually, i doubt many people want to sacrifice the last 2 for the 1st.
I skimmed over the key parts and think its a good article.
However i think there are some mistakes regarding his recommended setup: :P
10-30GB if your going to install lots of applications seams excessive, i fit my system in 4 and I'd be amazed if you could end up with >10GB for desktop programs perhaps 10-15GB would have been a better recommendation?
Swap should never be more than 1GB unless you plan on hibernating in which case 75% should be enough
(1473M with 951 swap hibernates fine), does anybody really use 4GB swap?
Also why would you use GNOME on ubuntu, KDE3 on debian forever!!!!!!!!
if you want cheap (or even IMO normal) hardware don't wait for apple to bring it, they wont!
so your not actually tasting the water, just the minerals
don't forget the whore, shes hot too!
but O2 -> O2 isn't a reaction so the Oxygen HAS to react with something.Experience suggests carbon is the best candidate to react, so carbon as a catalyst is unlikely.
when will people learn:
firefly (yeah if you put a series in the wrong genre and then move it around soo much it wont get rating)
Family guy (I don't actually like this one, but hey it was big enough to eventually come back)
Futurama (Why would you let the Simpson die such a slow death, while futurama was killed while still good)
im sure there are more.
They seam particularly bad at handling sci-fi, where due to their constant shuffles, it seams the only way to get ratings is to put crap that anybody can watch (in any order). This leads to monster of the week series with no plot/character development (e.g they pumped out 2 extra seasons of the x files when everybody was ready to let it die).
how come this offers
an amazing 10 to 15 hours of battery life for less than 2 pounds.
?
powertop shows a differences of just 3watts between low brighness display and blacked out,
*plus smaller displays use less power anyway (could somebody explain why you cant just use an array of white LEDs to backlight your screen though, its the backlight that uses the power right?)
*the are low power usage wireless chips, but i thought the main reason wireless drains power is because it has to wake up the CPU (on lower power CPUs this is a non-issue)
*graphics chips (where choice of chip can save a great deal) and drivers could turn the card off when the screen is blanked
*HDD usage which can be solved in software (soft-fsyncs, etc)
The tech is there for lower power usage netbooks, when the price of the other low-power components (OLED, wireless "on-a-chip", etc) drops ARM will matter.
I belive there is a GUI tickbox for that in kde4
If the lack of a GUI installer or package dependency management
Not being funny but, what exactly DOES it do then?
But you use the SAME tools, so why would you spend a few extra hundred bucks?
"Sure i can offer you a computer that will run your video editing software, OR i can charge you more for one to do the exact same thing!"
Your limited by video your editing software, the suites provide the functionality.
What benefit does a PC have over a Mac? Price? That's an illusion.
How so, you can pic up the specs for an the $1200 for less than $600, so even if mac osx has slight advantage in terms of AV technologies, this would instantly be neutralised by the specs of a pc you can pick up for $1000 (from retailers obviosuly if you only have a few of these it may be worth building it and trouncing anything else on spec)
Price £659.00 ( $1021)
Discount £30.00
Subtotal £629.00
Ex. VAT & Shipping
Intel® Coreâ2 Duo E8500 processor (3.16GHz, 1333MHz, 6MB cache)
20in E2009W WIDESCREEN Black UK/Irish (1680 x 1050) TCO99 DVI-D
4096MB 800MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [2x2048]
320GB (7200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive with 16MB DataBurstâ cache
256MB ATI® Radeonâ HD 3650 graphics card
Microsoft® Works 9.0 - English + 16x DVD +/- RW Drive + Dellâ Entry Quietkey USB Keyboard - UK/Irish (QWERTY) + Dell 2 Button USB Optical Mouse
Obviously not, but that is the best way to get the concept of whats going on, into a form us humans can understand, duh! Like when the communications of the 2nd foundation are transcribed into words because their form of communication is so advanced we wouldn't understand it!